Now to two additional perspectives on the conflict with Iran.

Aaron David Miller is a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and a longtime State Department official in both Democratic and Republican administrations.

And Holly Dagress is a senior fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

She spent her teenage years in Tehran and curates the Iranist.

That is a weekly newsletter.

Our thanks to you both for being here.

Aaron David Miller, I'll start with you and your initial reactions to this U.S. intelligence

assessment, this early assessment, that believes the strikes on Iran's nuclear program

sent it back only a few months at best.

You know, as a former member of the intelligence community, I take a clear, clear, accurate,

and unbiased and non-politicized intelligence seriously. DIA's estimates have always been

pretty conservative in its early days, as the Brits would say. This is one assessment. And frankly,

since I don't believe in Hollywood endings in this region, game changers, inflection points, transformations, I think we have to be

very, very, very sober and clear on it about the road that lies ahead. A, in terms of what damage we've actually done, that would in the

administration's rule, presidents would, quote, totally literate, unquote, Iran's nuclear

program. I don't think that's what's occurred. And second, how you convert a tenuous ceasefire

into a full cessation of hostilities and then a political

agreement, which seems to me the only way to actually, unless we're talking about changing the

regime, the only way to guarantee, if there is such a guarantee, that Iran won't have any clear of it.

And Holly Degress, where does this leave the Iranian regime?

Does it emerge stronger just by surviving, having survived these strikes?

Well, that's an important question that we're trying to answer right now because we're

...